Does this universal duty to work for free only concern security research?
>You can't just publish information harmful to public
It’s simply ridiculous to describe full disclosure like that.
Re:About the “Security Issue” on VLC
by throwaway_391 on Friday July 26, 2019 @09:03AM
(#20534446)
I've heard some interesting arguments about publicly dropping 0days to make organisations pull their heads in - Places like Microsoft which historically weren't -great- at security 'deserved' it. I'm not saying that argument is right or wrong, but it was interesting nonetheless.
But dropping a 0day irresponsibly can lead to actual impact - what happens if a good person is persecuted, or executed because of the information you disclosed publicly? What about a hundred. Or a thousand?
I did not say duty to work for free, but duty to observe some restrictions and weighing positive/negative impacts of your publications on society if you choose to work in that domain.
You can't just publish information harmful to public and say "well I'm a researcher, so I can do anything I want". Publishing instructions to bypass important security restrictions that people rely on is often harmful and may be even illegal in some countries, for good reason - to protect the people.